State v. Harrington

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Harrington

848 S.W.2d 643, 1993 Mo. App. LEXIS 391, 1993 WL 73681

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided March 16, 1993·No. Nos. 60143, 61923·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant was convicted by jury of possession of cocaine, a Class C felony, and distribution of cocaine near a school, a Class A felony. He was sentenced as a prior offender. He appeals the denial, after a hearing, of his 29.15 motion based on ineffective assistance of counsel and appeals his conviction under § 195.214, RSMo (Supp.1992). We affirm per Rule 84.16(b) and Rule 30.25(b). No error of law appears; the motion court’s findings are not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant was convicted by jury of possession of cocaine, a Class C felony, and distribution of cocaine near a school, a Class A felony. He was sentenced as a prior offender. He appeals the denial, after a hearing, of his 29.15 motion based on ineffective assistance of counsel and appeals his conviction under § 195.214, RSMo (Supp.1992). We affirm per Rule 84.16(b) and Rule 30.25(b). No error of law appears; the motion court’s findings are not clearly erroneous. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only.

State v. Harrington, 848 S.W.2d 643, 1993 Mo. App. LEXIS 391, 1993 WL 73681 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

848 S.W.2d 643 (State v. Harrington) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.